Dr. John MacArthur delivered a 2002 sermon on the Roman Catholic priesthood, which later appeared on You Tube. It is theological at the beginning, historical in the middle, and empathetic at the end. It may sound judgmental, but please read it to the end. That was not what it was intended to be. Here is a summary of his words:
Let’s talk about the issue of celibacy. Celibacy is an obligatory law to be a priest. But a poll shows that 70-80% of Roman Catholics believe that the priests should be allowed to be married. The Magisterium (Catholic official doctrine) defends celibacy partly on Matthew 19:12 where Jesus said ‘there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake.’ The Apostle Paul, in I Corinthians 7, also says in times of extreme distress, being single is better. Catholic thinking was, you don’t have to worry about the wife and the family’s safety, so you can give your entire focus on the Lord, even in poverty. But I (Dr. MacArthur) question all that. Paul also says in the same chapter that in normal times it’s better to marry than to burn with passion. Actually, those verses make it very clear that overall, marriage is preferable to singleness. Some tried to twist the Scripture so as to make Peter into an unmarried man. In I Corinthians 9:5, where Paul says, “Do we have no right to take along a believing wife, as do also the other apostles, the brothers of the Lord, and Cephas” (Note: Cephas is another name for Peter. He clearly had a wife.) The Catholic Bible says, for that verse, “…a believing sister....” But the Greek word is “wife.” Twisting Scripture to make it agree to doctrine. Thus, making celibacy mandatory is utterly unbiblical. Here’s an interesting reference to celibacy in I Timothy 4: 1-5:
Now the Spirit expressly says that in latter times some will depart from the faith, giving heed to deceiving spirits and doctrines of demons…having their own conscience seared with a hot iron, 3 forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from foods which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth. 4 For every creation of God is good, and nothing is to be refused if it is received with thanksgiving; 5 for it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.
Paul is saying, those who forbid marriage (or certain foods on Fridays) are advocating a doctrine of demons (with the exception of economic or political extremes, such as persecution). They are listening to deceitful spirits. I really believe that Satan has managed to control this element of the Catholic system. The Bible clearly says that marriage, like food, is to be sanctified, and received with gratitude—because marriage comes from God.
Celibacy grew slowly in the Catholic world; it started in the 2nd century. It had a pagan history already in places like Asia and Buddhism. The 3rd century saw the theology of Gnosticism becoming popular—they emphasized that ‘matter’ (like the body) was evil. Its followers took the path of scorning the things of the flesh. It was felt that attainment of the highest levels of spirituality was only possible if the body’s needs or desires were supplanted or supressed. Many took vows of poverty, of chastity, of obedience, of stoic diets, even of silence. Many other groups felt that Mary remained chaste, a virgin, so they followed her. The truth is, she had a whole family with Joseph (Matthew 13:55-56, as any version reads. Assuming that Joseph had a family before he met Mary has no Scriptural support.) Others followed Christ, who was celibate. This was by choice. But forcing celibacy among bishops, priests, and deacons happened first in Spain around 390 AD; Catholic supervisors were simply told they would be deposed if they kept their wife and children. Nevertheless, celibacy spread and completely dominated Catholicism in the West by the 5th century. But east of Constantinople (Istanbul today), the Orthodox churches never took to it and later split from the Roman churches.
It was finally made their canon in 1079. But widespread sexual sin followed. Quoting a reliable historian:
This mandate generated all kinds of immorality. The abodes of priests were often dens of corruption. It was common to see priests frequenting taverns, gambling, having orgies, and speaking blasphemy. Many priests kept mistresses; and convents became houses of ill fame. In many places the people were delighted at seeing a priest with a mistress because the married women would be safe from him.
This celibacy requirement began under Pope Gregory VII. If you ask, “Why did he do this?” The answer is political. Anyone who desired to be a priest, if married, was immediately separated from his wife and his children—permanently--AND it was required that all his property was confiscated. Priests, before that time, were very influential, very powerful people. They had wealth, passed it down through their families, and it accumulated, giving families power and influence. The Pope determined that priests controlled too much wealth, and the Church should take it. Because if the Church was going to have more power than the State, if it wanted to rule the world, it needed to take wealth and property away from the people in power. (The number-one landowner on the planet today is the Church).
The serious problem was, women were cut loose with no means of support or land, so they could not grow food, and many of them died of hunger. Some were suicides; some turned into streetwalkers. But the Church accumulated massive wealth. The regular people, largely illiterate and poor, presumably supported this dictum. (Get back at the rich priests!) They scorned, even attacked and mutilated the priests when they refused to obey. The disobedient priests were run out of town and exiled. If they wouldn’t give up all their property, the Church would exile them and confiscate their property. Their children were designated as illegitimate, and their wives were often buried in unconsecrated earth. (That put them, in their minds, in danger of hell).
So it was all about power, about avarice, about a system that wanted to engulf the earth—a horrible story surrounding an unbiblical, pagan doctrine. In an Oxford Encyclopedia entry under the Reformation Age, Hans Hildebrand, editor, Oxford University Press, 1996, wrote that the priests, without a wife now, often lived with a long-term concubine, and received special dispensation from their religious supervisor so as to have their children legitimated. But this, too, changed in the late 12th century when concubinage was prohibited. Some clergy responded to this latest dictum by rioting. Enforcement of this meant women from reputable families no longer entered into relationships with priests, knowing that it could never be called a valid marriage. But the priests often could not withhold their sexual desires, and defied the mandates by simply using discretion in their sexual relations. Denied any release, and usually unsaved, they often slid into gross corruption.
Keep one thing in mind: a vow of celibacy does not mean you are bound to a promise of chastity. Canon law does not require sexual chastity; it only prohibits marriage. You don’t break the law of celibacy by engaging in sexual relationships. Because of its ‘lesser’ importance, they decided that absolution for sexual relations comes by pardon from a fellow priest. That’s all you have to do to get it expunged! (Sorry, but God doesn’t so easily absolve this unbiblical ‘law.’) If a priest wanted to get married, on the other hand, absolution has to come only one way—from the Pope. Why this inequality of treatment of sexual sin vs. marriage "sin"? Because they care more about a priest who marries, and the impact that will have on the power of the system, than they do about a priest who commits sexual sin. Marriage is far worse for the confiscatory system than sexual sin, because it threatens the Church’s power and property.
In light of all this, how can the Church hold that marriage is a sacrament, as Scripture insists, the way that they compromised it? Their most holy people—priests and nuns—are denied this sacrament. The Council of Trent, which solidified Catholic doctrines to counteract the Reformation, pronounced anathema (damnation) on all who teach that the marriage state is preferable to celibacy. But Jesus even said, ‘Not all men can bear that.’ Paul said, ‘It is better to marry than to burn.’ God made all of us sexual, as adults. For them to force celibacy is also an effort to see the priest as more divine than you. You will confess to him, you will, upon dying, ask him to read last rites. Neither of these is Scriptural. God commands us to confess to Him; no human mediator is necessary, except to a peer. In the eyes of the priesthood, considering they were still often taught that the flesh is evil, they often perceived that sexual desires is inherently unclean—so, they were (and probably are) filled with guilt. And unable to give good advice to families.
Lorraine Boettner, in a book on Catholicism, writes:
Henry VIII of England, in 1535, appointed commissioners to inspect all monasteries and nunneries. So terrible were the cruelties and corruptions uncovered, that a cry went up from the nation that all such houses without exception to be destroyed.
True, Henry wanted to dismiss Catholic theology so he could continue to divorce and remarry, but he couldn’t have gotten away with destroying their housing without tacit approval of the people. We conclude that priests were still actively involved with sexual sin. By the way, having men who are trying to suppress their minds, in monasteries with other pent-up men, and all day, every day, listening to people in confessionals describing their own iniquities, sexual or otherwise—is that a healthy environment? How can the priest think holy thoughts? My heart goes out to priests. Boettner’s book further says, ‘The largest collection of books in the world on the subject of sex is in the Vatican Library.’ (Who checks them out?!)
The Catholics still teach priests a divided system, which is not in the Bible; the natural, or secular, and the spiritual. Only the spiritual was pleasing to God. While the natural man is satisfied in the day-to-day mundane, the ideal was found in the mystic, who disdained the day-to-day issues. To him, the natural events were viewed as a hindrance. For the priest and the nun in monasteries or convents, withdrawal from everyone was the only way to truly develop the spiritual. BUT in God’s eyes, there is no difference between the sacred and the secular, in seeking spirituality. Scripture tells us that whatever you do, whether to eat or drink, you do it all to the glory of God (I Corinthians 10:31). You don’t serve God better by withdrawing from the world. Jesus even prayed, ‘Father, I’m not asking that You take them out of the world, but to protect them from the evil one (John 17). The Catholic doctrine of celibacy, as we have seen, given our sinful nature, had actually the opposite effect; it forfeited the reality of developing the spiritual life. Forced celibacy introduces hindrances that will diminish, even pervert, most peoples’ spirituality. Charles Hodge wrote the truth about marriage in his Systematic Theology:
It is only in a married state that some of the purest, most disinterested, and most elevated principles of our nature are called into exercise. All that concerns filial piety and parental and especially maternal affection depends on marriage for its very existence. It is in the bosom of the family that there is a constant call for acts of kindness, of self-denial, of forbearance, and of love. The family therefore is the sphere best adapted for the development of all the social virtues, and it may be safely said that there is far more of moral excellence and of true religion to be found in Christian households than in the desolate homes of priests or in the gloomy cells of monks and nuns.
To introduce another element, latest surveys say that 50% of new priests are homosexuals. But these men are predators, tempting the pent-up priests already there. The thing that’s so sad about the priests is, he gave up all relationships, so he has no past to bring with him and treasure it. His family name, without a child, has no future, so he has no legacy, and no binding family life. This is truly sad.
A Scripture often misapplied is in Luke 14:26, where Jesus says:
If anyone comes to Me and does not hate his father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters, yes, and his own life also, he cannot be My disciple.
This verse is often taught to mean that Jesus told us to cut ourselves off from family. It is instead a hyperbole, much like Matthew 19:24, where the likelihood for a rich person to enter heaven is compared to a camel going through the eye of a needle. It’s not impossible for the rich to enter heaven, just difficult. Likewise here: Jesus is not saying to cut off and hate wife, mother, etc. He is saying that our love for Him must exceed our love for our wife, etc. To the point that if your wife or your mom rejects Christ, you should still trust Him and endure persecution, even if you’re abandoned by your family by so doing. (In some societies, most notably Muslim, your own family will beat you if you become a Christian; they even have permission by the authorities to kill you.) But this verse does not teach to cut priests off from family. Priests are broken, shattered, tragic, disconnected people. They are victims of a terrible system. It is a soul-destroying process.
On the elephant in the room, pedophilia: A recent survey shows that the average male homosexual offender will abuse 150 boys. (The average heterosexual violator will abuse 20 girls or women). Abusers of children don’t quit; they can’t quit. The Church should have taken lightning action to eliminate this—but they’re spending most energies on hiding it and just moving these awful priests around. Pedophilia is not where a priest begins, it’s the end of a long, long, pornographic conduct trail. Pedophilia is the caboose on the train. You don’t start your sin there—you end there. The deviation, after awhile, still doesn’t satisfy anymore as at first; so, often, the age of the child-victim has to get younger, so as to increase his excitement.
About the nuns: There is a corrupt system to proselyte young women to become a nun. The confessional is the recruiting booth for the convents. The best ‘prospects’ for nuns are young women who are coming off of a shattered relationship. The Church looks for a sensitive soul who comes often to confession, often attends Mass. So they prey on these women in their time of weakness, offering them that they can be like the Virgin Mary, having a secondary virginity. Or they will emphasize that the young woman could be married to Christ, and experience no betrayal of trust. They have 60 days to give their possessions to the Church. For her to renounce the family is harder than for the men. She has to kill all maternal instincts, which are God-given; she has to put to death the idea of being cared for by a man, which is God-given. In the end, the nun is one of the most remarkable products of the Catholic Church. She is really a slave—she occupies hundreds of hospitals, or she teaches—either way, is poorly-paid. Likewise in parochial schools and orphanages, she is willing to offer her life (this control would fill Communist leaders with jealousy).
There is no way we can strike an alliance with this system. We need to rescue these people, both priests and nuns, and give them the real Gospel which does not depend on works to get saved. Give them freedom and deliverance in Christ.
No comments:
Post a Comment